DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23609542·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing about 1 year agoGRANTED

THAI MING CHIU VS. CRYSTAL LEI ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration And Relief Under Ccp Sections 1008 And 473

Hearing date
Jul 17, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party
Next hearing
Aug 19, 2025

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Reconsideration rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTHAI MING CHIU
DefendantCRYSTAL LEI

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC23609542 - July 17, 2025 Hearing date: July 17, 2025 Case number: CGC23609542 Case title: THAI MING CHIU VS. CRYSTAL LEI ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23609542 | Case Title: | | THAI MING CHIU VS. CRYSTAL LEI ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-07-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration And Relief Under Ccp Sections 1008 And 473 | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for July 17, 2025, line 3.

Motion for Reconsideration and Relief Under CCP Sections 1008 and 473 is GRANTED. The Motion for Summary Judgment hearing was continued by an order that took Defendant's counsel by surprise, which justifies relief under CCP Section 473.

As such, the Court orders that the Motion for Summary Judgment currently set for hearing on October 8, 2025 be advanced to August 19, 2025 at 9:30 am in Department 501. =(501/CFH)

Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849).

Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required.

Notice of contesting a tent ative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified and the opposing party does not appear. | |

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share